Re: Autocorrelation (Jont Allen )

Subject: Re: Autocorrelation
From:    Jont Allen  <jba(at)RESEARCH.ATT.COM>
Date:    Wed, 19 Jul 2000 03:46:05 -0400

Christian, I would like to suggest that you place some samples on the web that demonstrate the effects you are talking about, along with a short summary of your paper(s), describing and summarizing your point of view. Many of us are interested (some at a superficial level) and we would like to better understand the arguments, and get up to speed with all of this discussion, without spending a day, or days, doing it. If, by chance, you already have such a web site, then this would be a great time to give us the URL. One short question: Do you, Christian, feel that the tails of tuning curves is relevant to your mechanism B, or to mechanism A for that matter? If so, would you please articulate why you feel that way? Thanks, Jont Christian Kaernbach wrote: > > Dear Peter, > ..... > > > The tails of tuning curves come into the present discussion partly > > because K & D used low-pass noise, and this low-pass noise also has > > the effect of masking the pitch produced by higher partials, thereby > > lowering its salience and making the task more like a pitch detection > > near threshold rather than the masking of a more salient pitch well > > above threshold > > The use of low-pass noise is indispensable. A major argument to assume > that there is a second mechanism involved in pitch perception working on > unresolved harmonics (let's call it "mechanism B") is the increase of > the JND once resolvable harmonics are excluded. Exclusion means: > down-filtering _and_ masking. As long as harmonics well below 15 Fo (say > at 10 Fo) are either present or not masked, the improvement in JND by a > factor of at leat five indicates that we have not yet isolated > "mechanism B". This is nicely illustrated in our paper under revision > (Bering & Kaernbach). For the same reason, Houtsma & Smurzynski used > pink noise that was not even low-pass filtered. > > Anyway, as we employed high-pass filtered click trains there should be > regions where the signal is relatively undisturbed by the low-pass > filtered noise. And the use of low-pass noise does not offer a plausible > explanation of why first- and second-order regularities should be > treated differently. > > - Christian Kaernbach -- Jont B. Allen AT&T Labs-Research, Shannon Laboratory, E161 180 Park Ave., Florham Park NJ, 07932-0971 973/360-8545voice, x7111fax, "You can't hope to win unless you know how to lose." "An expert is one who has made all the mistakes in a subfield." "Good judgment comes from experience, which comes from bad judgment." "Experience is what you get when you dont get what you want." -rlg

This message came from the mail archive
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University